Page:Critique of Pure Reason 1855 Meiklejohn tr.djvu/383

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
OF THE COSMOLOGICAL IDEA OF FREEDOM.
341

diate cognition only of the empirical character.[1] then, in so far as it is to be ascribed to an intelligible cause, does not result from it in accordance with empirical laws. That is to say, not the conditions of pure reason, but only their effects in the internal sense, precede the act. Pure reason, as a purely intelligible faculty, is not subject to the conditions of time. The causality of reason in its intelligible character does not begin to be; it does not make its appearance at a certain time, for the purpose of producing an effect. If this were not the case, the causality of reason would be subservient to the natural law of phænomena, which determines them according to time, and as a series of causes and effects in time; it would consequently cease to be freedom, and become a part of nature. We are therefore justified in saying—If reason stands in a causal relation to phænomena, it is a faculty which originates the sensuous condition of an empirical series of effects. For the condition, which resides in the reason, is non-sensuous, and therefore cannot be originated, or begin to be. And thus we find—what we could not discover in any empirical series—a condition of a successive series of events itself empirically unconditioned. For, in the present case, the condition stands out of and beyond the series of phænomena—it is intelligible, and it consequently cannot be subject to any sensuous condition, or to any time-determination by a preceding cause.

But, in another respect, the same cause belongs also to the series of phænomena. Man is himself a phænomenon. His will has an empirical character, which is the empirical cause of all his actions. There is no condition—determining man and his volition in conformity with this character—which does not itself form part of the series of effects in nature, and is subject to their law—the law according to which an empirically undetermined cause of an event in time cannot exist. For this reason no given action can have an absolute and spontaneous origination, all actions being phænomena, and belong-

  1. The real morality of actions—their merit or demerit, and even that of our own conduct, is completely unknown to us. Our estimates can relate only to their empirical character. How much is the result of the action of free-will, how much is to be ascribed to nature and to blameless error, or to a happy constitution of temperament (merito fortunæ), no one can discover, nor, for this reason, determine with perfect justice.